SIUE Faculty Senate Welfare Council
Meeting, Sept. 22, 2007
Meeting convened: 2:30 pm
Present: Allison Fahsl, Ed Hershberger, Joe Keene, Jon Pettibone, Laurie Puchner, Catherine Seltzer, Allison Thomason, Tianlong Yu, Lisa Welch
1. No new announcements
2. Minutes from April 2007 meeting—approved unanimously
3. Action Items
a. WC Annual Report for 2006-07 Academic Year—approved unanimously
b. Pettibone appointed to serve as WC designate on Honorary Degrees and Distinguished Service Awards Committee
c. Standing sub-committee assignments and general discussion of issues on each committee’s agenda for coming year:
1. Faculty Status Committee: Thomason (chair), Fahsl, Pettibone, Seltzer
Issues: Grievance procedure revisions to come to WC from Working Group, Ombuds search (begins in October); Ombuds bi-annual evaluation (Spring, 2008)
2. Faculty Benefits and Facilities Committee: Welch (chair), Hershberger, Tian Yu, Joe Keene
--Salary Equity Task Force: report expected regarding gender equity ---Family Friendly Policies Task Force: report expected
--Emeritus/Retired Faculty Status Task Force: report expected
--Definition of “family”/”immediate family” in Faculty Handbook—including and beyond SSDP’s. Brief discussion amongst WC members of issues involved.
--Inclement weather policy
4. Visit of Jeff McLellan from University Counsel’s office: Explanation and discussion of revisions for Grievance Procedures. (3:15-4:15 pm))
McLellan explained that in spring 2006, a working group representing faculty and administration was formed to explore changes to the faculty grievance policy. This working group discussed the possibility of moving from SIUE’s current randomized “jury style” of hearing panel to a structure with some form of standing committee.
The advantages of a standing, elected committee would be to 1) vet the merit and applicability of grievances and determine which grievances could “go forward” into hearings; and 2) assure consistency of policy application across grievances through time. McLellan and WC discussed both advantages and disadvantages of standing committees in grievances.
A third or “hybrid” alternative would be to have some sort of broadly based elected, standing committee to vet grievances and supply members (1 or 2) to individual hearing panels once formed. The remaining members of the hearing panel would be taken from a randomized “jury” style list.
5. Discussion of these and other issues ensued, including use of audiotaped or videotaped transcripts (vs. court reporter), size and composition of hearing panels and standing committee, and issues of liability for grievance committee members
6. Old Business
7. New Business: introduced idea to revise University guidelines on Sabbatical Applications
Meeting adjourned: 4:30 pm